It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Students walk out in protest of teacher suspension

page: 7
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by skep
FlyerFan is apparently a blind follower of the current Reich,

Oh gawd. Grow up already. You don't know me.
You don't know anything about me. Throw your
radical left wing rhetoric around elsewhere. This
is a place for GROWN UP discussion of the issues.


Turn over a statement or question like this to air-heads
and we get the furor we now have.


It's called discussing if a person in an authoritative position
over children took advantage of that and it's discussion as
to if the teacher followed the rules of the school, if he followed
what was approved by the town and state to teach.

To call people who wish to investigate this 'air-heads' is
very immature of you.


The Principal is obviously weak-kneed and politically correct.


No. The principal is doing his job. The professor is not.
The principal HAS TO follow school rules. So does the
professor. The professor did not and so he has to be
reprimanded. It's that simple. That's how it works in
the grown up world. Do the job you were hired to do or get fired.




posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
human geography is not geography per se. It is the
study of humans in the given geographical areas.


Sounds like old fashioned SOCIOLOGY, doesn't it?
So why don't they just call it sociology if that's what it is?
Geography is something totally different from Sociology.

Which was he teaching... geography or sociology?
What has been said in the papers is geography.

That being the case, his rant(s) was(were) out of place
and had nothing to do with what was supposed to be taught.

Hasn't this thread gotten way off topic? Wasn't it supposed
to be about the students walking out 'in protest' of the
teacher getting in trouble?

Can we all agree that those kiddies didn't walk out due to any
indepth knowledge of the rules of the school, the subject, the
situation ... but that they walked out for some free time out
of school? They'd protest pickles just to get out of class at that age.



[edit on 3/5/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 08:08 AM
link   
The student was interviewed last night by John Kasich on Heartland, and he took the teacher's lawyer to task over the correct name of the course. If I recall, the student said the name of the course was Advanced World Geography, and he also emphasized that it was not a college-level course, as the lawyer was stating.



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
I have heard repeatedly that this class is almost at college level. Who cares.

The students new the course description and they knew that this course would be filled with controversies.

Thats what the teacher game him. He also gave them the truth as far as how this world feels about GWB...You guys have to learn to accept this.

I would have had the same class but left out the "Hitler" name. There are others this admin could be compared to in the same vain.

Lets see:

Similarities to Hitler-

Had many rooting for him because he was protecting them from terrorists


Had many on his side because the terror threat was so great they rallied around him.

Had something similar to the Patriot Act in place

I could go on and on and on. THIS TEACHER HASNT SAID ANYTHING that hasnt been said by never mind the public, but even Republicans in congress have voiced out their fears of this man by now. Our radio waves are now telling the truth.
Lou Dobbs is out there telling the TRUTH on CNN. God bless him. He is the best. This man has taken his job seriously and i give him a lot of credit.


Lou was told to shut up and now more than ever is voiciferous.


The kid is a shupstirrer and so are his parents. AND BOY! How Hannity jumped all over this story like a cheap suit.
Anything to talk about the evil liberals. By the way, Sean Hannity ought to get a life.


If i were the teacher and i was running a class of this description I surely would bring up Bush and cohorts.



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe

Thats what the teacher game him. He also gave them the truth as far as how this world feels about GWB...You guys have to learn to accept this.

No he didn't. He gave them his opinion about GWB. And he didn't bring another, opposing view into the discussion, as the school regulations required be done.


I could go on and on and on. THIS TEACHER HASNT SAID ANYTHING that hasnt been said by never mind the public, but even Republicans in congress have voiced out their fears of this man by now. Our radio waves are now telling the truth.

You are overlooking the fact that a teacher in front of the class does not enjoy the same freedom of speech as a teacher standing on a soapbox on his day off has.



The kid is a shupstirrer and so are his parents.

Blaming the kid, huh, dg? That's pathetic. All in the name of partisan politics.:shk:



posted on Mar, 5 2006 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
The kid is a shupstirrer and so are his parents.


No neither he nor his parents are what you claim. The 2nd student (BRAD)said the very same thing took place a few years ago which backs up and make his claim very creditable. In fact Brad even gave a few more details regarding this bozo's hatred of his father, use of drugs and discussing his sex life in class with students.


I know I sure would not want anyone like that teaching my kids, especially when he discussed his own sex life and use of drugs.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Agreed, if you change "religious followers" to "anti-Christian activists".


Actually, the problem is anyone who is so attached to their beliefs that they feel they must convince others or push their beliefs on others, or disallow others' beliefs to be entertained. In other words, the problem is people who must be 'right', regardless of their particular beliefs.

Whether they are religious followers, anti-Christian activists, atheists, democrats or republicans. Anyone who "preaches" their position to their audience as the only 'right' and viable option becomes a problem in a learning environment.

Everyone has opinions and should be free to share them, it's when opposing opinions are not permitted that the problem arises. And according to the transcript, this was not the case. In fact, student Sean Allen played a large role in the discussion with an opposing viewpoint, which was encouraged by the teacher.



Transcript
And I'm not in any way implying that you should agree with me. I don't even know if I'm necessarily taking a position. But what I'm trying to get you to do is to think, right, about these issues more in-depth, you know, and not just take things from the surface. And I'm glad you asked all your questions, because they're very good, legitimate questions. And hopefully that allows other people to begin to think about some of those things, too.


I wonder if the school rules state that an opposing viewpoint must be presented specifically by the teacher. Or if the teacher sanctioning participation of the students' conflicting opinions is adequate.



This is most evident in the banning of nativity scenes from school while at the same time allowing displays of the Jewish menorah and Islamic star and crescent .


I haven't seen a case where this happens, but if it does, it's inconsistent and should be addressed.


Originally posted by dgtempe
THIS TEACHER HASNT SAID ANYTHING that hasnt been said by never mind the public, but even Republicans in congress have voiced out their fears of this man by now. Our radio waves are now telling the truth.


Finally!




Lou Dobbs is out there telling the TRUTH on CNN. God bless him. He is the best. This man has taken his job seriously and i give him a lot of credit.



I love me some Lou Dobbs!


The Hitler comparison (while glaringly obvious to some) is still a very sensitive spot with many. The comparisons of Bush to Hitler are in the quality of his actions, not the quantity. At least not yet. I predict, if left unchecked, we will see more and more quantitative similarities.

And still, some will deny it. People denied that Hitler was evil, too.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   
Look, people, i hate to keep bringing up my childhood. BUT i do it to make a point. When i was growing up in the tropical paradise known as Cuba, we had a dictator. His name was Fulgencio Batista. Although no one was happy with him, we did have liberties unless you were a personal target of this man. We lived a good life.
Inspite of this, when Castro came with his revolutionaries and LIED to the people so he could have support,- Every Cuban man, woman and child saw a way for Cuba to be liberated at once.
They listened to Castro's lies and BELEIVED HIM. wHAT HAPPENS NEXT? hE COMES OUT OF THE COMMUNIST CLOSET and announces that he is with the Russians and that he is communist. Hence, the exodus to the United States by almost 2 million Cubans.

While 90% of Cubans thought that Fidel was evil, the other 10% likened him to Hitler, Stalin, etc.

This will go down in history, in history books, in the perception of the world that Castro is evil.

Had this teacher in question mentioned the Cuban situation, he would have mentioned all this and more. What do you suppose would happen to this teacher in an oppressed country like that? They would have given him "Paredon", not to be confused with "pardon"
Paredon means to put him against a wall and blast him to kingdom come.

This great country of ours is fast leaning this way. You talk, you're screwed. He has freedom of speech, imo, and whoever doesnt like it should get out of his class and move on. The student should look for something more his style.
He's been indoctrinated to the Republican beleifs and i will tell you again, the kid is a shupstirrer, first class.

Its in vogue to cause trouble , only its going to come back to haunt the kid.
What some people wont do to make the Hannity show......I wonder how he feels about minorities...Not good, i betcha.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:11 AM
link   
The US is not Cuba. High school classrooms are not a paltform for teachers to preach their own rhetoric. Like I posted before, this guys is a loser who could not hold a competant conversation with a peer so he uses on a group who 'has to listen', because he is the teacher, and they are the students.

I had a Sociology teacher in high school, who for the first 10 minutes of class would do current events or some such. However, it was alsways a different kid who had to bring up a subject, and we discussed it. Whether this teacher compared Bush to Hitler or Charlamagne it would not matter, it had no basis to be in his class.

This teacher needs to try to teach a college level course, in which he will be ripped apart by some Right-wing wanna be when he opens his mouth I am sure. He already got his a** handed to him by a kid.

There are many, many other geo=political situtations that have occured in the past 3000 years that he could have taught this kids how to learn from history and not make the same mistakes in the future. That is what a teacher is for.

If he wants to mentor, start an after school program.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:14 AM
link   
No, they are not like Cuba's. Not in the present. In the past, they were better.

You missed my point.

ps. IT MOST CERTAINLY IS THE PLACE IF THE CLASS DESCRIPTION TELLS THE STUDENTS THAT SUBJECTS WILL BE OF THIS NATURE.

WHAT IS IT ABOUT THIS YOU DONT UNDERSTAND?

If i go to the class and the sylabus tells me the class will be sexually explicit, do i then have the right to turn the teacher in for showing me a vagina and a penus?????

Oh, you dont give up. I'm out of here.

[edit on 6-3-2006 by dgtempe]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:24 AM
link   
I was trying to state that The US is not Cuba, that's all. I understood your point. At this time, I am sure in Cuba that they are taught a strict regime of propoganda in schools. I live in Florida in the Tampa area, which is very rich with Cubans and their are very emphatic about wanting change, and their hatred of Castro. I went to school with a few, and they are extremly patriotic, and well versed in what actually goes on in Cuba.

So, I think the teacher should teach about the entire 1950's-60's US-Cuban tension. There is alot to be learned there about cultrual geography. How about the Korean war? Or the crusades? The seperation of countries and the changes since WW2? or a thousand other geo-political issues through the ages.

Like I stated, this guy had a captive audience, and he got busted. Time for him to move on and control kids as a assistant manager at the local Wendys.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Actually, the problem is anyone who is so attached to their beliefs that they feel they must convince others or push their beliefs on others, or disallow others' beliefs to be entertained. In other words, the problem is people who must be 'right', regardless of their particular beliefs.

Yeah, so? You're going to try to attribute that characteristic to the student, and I'm going to attribute it to the teacher.


Whether they are religious followers, anti-Christian activists, atheists, democrats or republicans. Anyone who "preaches" their position to their audience as the only 'right' and viable option becomes a problem in a learning environment.

And students are a captive audience, at the mercy of this authoritarian figure.


Everyone has opinions and should be free to share them, it's when opposing opinions are not permitted that the problem arises. And according to the transcript, this was not the case. In fact, student Sean Allen played a large role in the discussion with an opposing viewpoint, which was encouraged by the teacher.



Transcript
And I'm not in any way implying that you should agree with me. I don't even know if I'm necessarily taking a position. But what I'm trying to get you to do is to think, right, about these issues more in-depth, you know, and not just take things from the surface. And I'm glad you asked all your questions, because they're very good, legitimate questions. And hopefully that allows other people to begin to think about some of those things, too.


First of all, the teacher does not have the same first amendment rights when he is teaching as he does on a soapbox on his day off. That is a fact that some here do not want to admit.

Second, the closing statements by the teacher were merely a way of his trying to cover his butt. That is obvious if you listen to his preceding rant.


I wonder if the school rules state that an opposing viewpoint must be presented specifically by the teacher. Or if the teacher sanctioning participation of the students' conflicting opinions is adequate.

Hardly adequate.



This is most evident in the banning of nativity scenes from school while at the same time allowing displays of the Jewish menorah and Islamic star and crescent .



I haven't seen a case where this happens, but if it does, it's inconsistent and should be addressed.

Google "nativity scene banned" and look at the NY case, for one.


Originally posted by dgtempe
THIS TEACHER HASNT SAID ANYTHING that hasnt been said by never mind the public, but even Republicans in congress have voiced out their fears of this man by now. Our radio waves are now telling the truth.



Finally!



Once again, I cite the 1st amendment factoid I pointed out earlier.


The Hitler comparison (while glaringly obvious to some) is still a very sensitive spot with many. The comparisons of Bush to Hitler are in the quality of his actions, not the quantity. At least not yet. I predict, if left unchecked, we will see more and more quantitative similarities.

And still, some will deny it. People denied that Hitler was evil, too.

These Bush-Hitler comparisons are old, stale, and prove nothing. Next thing you'll be saying something really condemning, like they both liked to wear grey suits, therefore Bush must be a Nazi.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
This great country of ours is fast leaning this way. You talk, you're screwed. He has freedom of speech, imo, and whoever doesnt like it should get out of his class and move on. The student should look for something more his style.

So you want to give the teacher full first amendment rights. But if the student speaks up, you want him to get out of the classroom?

Do you realize what you are saying?


Its in vogue to cause trouble , only its going to come back to haunt the kid.
What some people wont do to make the Hannity show......I wonder how he feels about minorities...Not good, i betcha.

Low blow, and completely unfounded, dg.


Did you see the Heartland interview with the kid, his mom, and Bennish's lawyer? His mom is a very dedicated, involved parent, who has worked hard to improve the school district through fundraisers, civic involvement, etc. What kind of characteristic's are those, dg? Democratic?

Btw, Bennish was invited onto Hannity's show, but was too cowardly to go on. He'll save his interviews for Lou Dobbs, I suppose.


[edit on 6-3-2006 by jsobecky]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 11:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Yeah, so? You're going to try to attribute that characteristic to the student,


Actually, no. I'm not talking about either of them, specifically. I was speaking in general terms.



First of all, the teacher does not have the same first amendment rights when he is teaching as he does on a soapbox on his day off.


I didn't say he did. I said nothing about the first amendment. He is allowed to speak to his class, though. I mean, that's what he's there for, right?


Originally posted by jsobecky
The liberal is passionate while the Republican student is an attention whore?


A. This was inappropriate in that other thread.

B. I am not, nor have I ever been registered with ANY political party. You keep bringing up the "democrat and republican thing" and it doesn't apply. I am not a democrat, nor do I care what label you insist putting on either of us.

C.
Passionate:
1 a : easily aroused to anger b : filled with anger : ANGRY
2 a : capable of, affected by, or expressing intense feeling b :

Yes, he's passionate.

D. I would never call the boy a nasty name. Not all of us resort to that kind of crap.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Jake -


First, I have to say, I'm very curious as to the context of your husband saying, "hypocrisy"


If I understand your points correctly, you're saying that discussing religion causes inflamed emotional responses at times. As a result, the teacher could get too preachy and use his or her position of authority to prevent the discussion from being fair, not allowing students to voice their own religious opinions. If this didn't take place, you would have no problem discussing religious ideas and beliefs in a school class.

However, you do believe ideologies are discussed in such a manner.

In one case, you state that there is a threat of religious discussion all too often degrading into preaching, which makes it an unacceptable topic. I can only assume this means you don't believe the same is possible when discussing ideologies.

I would suggest you're wrong. People can be just as passionate when it comes to ideologies as it does religion. Wars are fought over political ideology just as they've been fought over religion.

You also claim that the teacher was challenging the students to think in different ways than they usually do. Maybe Sean Allen, yeah. However, my experience in high school so many years ago would suggest otherwise. I was, at the time, a moderate (been getting a little more conservative every day
), but was still seen as out there by the general student population, especially in classes where politics were discussed. I'll bet if the teacher were to have said he encourages the Sunnis to eradicate the Shiites in Iraq or vice versa, he would have inspired a lot more controversy, a lot more discussion, and, if he played devil's advocate well, a lot more thought in the students. He probably would have also gotten far more than one complaint. That idea is not foreign to the geography of Iraq, but is foreign to us here, typically.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Jsobecky, now there's a good idea. If the kid went on the Lou Dobbs show, Lou would most definatedly get a the root of this problem with this kid. Since the kid is smart, he wont. He's not mature enough to handle cross examination by someone who will see thru him.


He will stick with Hannity and Fox. By the way, i'd like to know just how many friends he has now at that school. Not many, i bet. That teacher had lots of close relationships with the other kids, and i'm betting he will change schools because of this. He wouldnt want someone to kick his butt, after all.

I am sure the child is a church going kid, who has been indoctrinized not only by family but by the church to love Bush as he would love God.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by junglejake
First, I have to say, I'm very curious as to the context of your husband saying, "hypocrisy"



It was something along the lines of, "If you support the teacher voicing his political opinions in class, yet you don't support him voicing his religious opinions in class, you are engaging in hypocrisy, my sweet." Or some crap like that!


And realize now that he (my husband) is right. Where the school should allow all religious activity without sanctioning a particular one, they've chosen instead to remove any sign of religion from school whatsoever so as not to appear to sanction a particular one. And in my opinion, they do this so they don't have to sanction Wicca and other 'out-there' religions.



If I understand your points correctly, you're saying that discussing religion causes inflamed emotional responses at times. As a result, the teacher could get too preachy and use his or her position of authority to prevent the discussion from being fair, not allowing students to voice their own religious opinions. If this didn't take place, you would have no problem discussing religious ideas and beliefs in a school class.


That's not exactly what I'm saying. The above scenario could happen with any subject, not just religion.

There is always the danger of the teacher being so overbearing (in one area or another) as to not allow the students to voice their opinions. The fact that this was about politics, and Bush specifically, is why I think this case has been highlighted. If this teacher had been voicing his strong opinions on organic gardening, there would be no story.

And, I do feel that Mr. Bennish's style gave plenty of opportunity for the students to discuss their own opinions and views about politics and the president's speech.

So I'm backing off of my "There should be NO religion in school" stance and saying instead that all religious opinions should be allowed in school. However, I do believe that people are so attached to their religions (as the one right way), that an all-inclusive situation just wouldn't happen. They would want to sanction Christianity, Islam and Judaism, but none other. And that's against the Constitution.

Does that clarify my position?



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
The students new the course description and they knew that this course would be filled with controversies.



How screwed up is public education when such a statement was meant to be of comfort...................

Education should be about "FACTS" not opinion..........the word "controversy" should NOT even come up...........in HS

[edit on 6-3-2006 by thermopolis]



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


First of all, the teacher does not have the same first amendment rights when he is teaching as he does on a soapbox on his day off.


I didn't say he did. I said nothing about the first amendment. He is allowed to speak to his class, though. I mean, that's what he's there for, right?

Of course he is allowed to speak to his class. Within limits.



Originally posted by jsobecky
The liberal is passionate while the Republican student is an attention whore?


A. This was inappropriate in that other thread.

B. I am not, nor have I ever been registered with ANY political party. You keep bringing up the "democrat and republican thing" and it doesn't apply. I am not a democrat, nor do I care what label you insist putting on either of us.

You didn't call him an attention whore. But you said he liked the attention, which is somewhat disparaging, and implies motive.

You attribute a noble quality to the teacher, who you identify as liberal.

You then make a somewhat disparaging comment about the student. You could have pointed out some good quality of his, but you chose to go the other way.

Democrat/Republican is not the comparison I wanted to make. It is not a political issue as much as it is a philosophical one. And to you, it seems, liberal=good while conservative=bad.

And you have used the two labels. These are your words, from two posts in this thread:


Thank you, conservative leadership for shutting down yet another hope for the future.

And he's a die hard Republican.



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Would everyone feel the same if this teacher was 'praising' Bush? What if the child came home and said, "I think I am going to join the Army because of what my teacher said Today". He said we should all be partriotic and join.

Would you still be so easy to go forward with your feelings and your statements, or would you want to strangle the man who took your son/daughter out of college and sent them to Iraq?

think about it....



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join